Talk:Examples of generating functions - Revision history

Cewbot: Maintain {{WPBS}}: 1 WikiProject template. (Fix :Category:WikiProject banners with redundant class parameter)

2024-12-25T06:00:24Z

Maintain {{WPBS}}: 1 WikiProject template. (Fix Category:WikiProject banners with redundant class parameter)

← Previous revision		Revision as of 06:00, 25 December 2024
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{WikiProject banner shell~~\|class=Redirect~~\|		{{WikiProject banner shell\|
	{{WikiProject Mathematics}}		{{WikiProject Mathematics}}
	}}		}}

Cewbot: Maintain {{WPBS}} and vital articles: 1 WikiProject template. Create {{WPBS}}. Keep majority rating "Redirect" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 1 same rating as {{WPBS}} in {{Maths rating}}.

2024-02-01T14:56:22Z

Maintain {{WPBS}} and vital articles: 1 WikiProject template. Create {{WPBS}}. Keep majority rating "Redirect" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 1 same rating as {{WPBS}} in {{Maths rating}}.

← Previous revision		Revision as of 14:56, 1 February 2024
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{WikiProject banner shell\|class=Redirect\|
	{{maths rating
			{{WikiProject Mathematics}}
	\|class=redirect}}
			}}

	== Worked Examples? ==		== Worked Examples? ==
	Wouldn't wikibooks be a more appropriate place for "worked examples"? Wikipedia is not a textbook. --[[User:345Kai\|345Kai]] ([[User talk:345Kai\|talk]]) 23:37, 23 March 2009 (UTC)		Wouldn't wikibooks be a more appropriate place for "worked examples"? Wikipedia is not a textbook. --[[User:345Kai\|345Kai]] ([[User talk:345Kai\|talk]]) 23:37, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Felix QW: Classified as a redirect

2022-01-20T17:51:42Z

Classified as a redirect

← Previous revision		Revision as of 17:51, 20 January 2022
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{maths rating}}		{{maths rating
			\|class=redirect}}

	== Worked Examples? ==		== Worked Examples? ==

Felix QW: Add WP

2022-01-07T22:59:42Z

Add WP

← Previous revision		Revision as of 22:59, 7 January 2022
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{maths rating}}

	== Worked Examples? ==		== Worked Examples? ==
	Wouldn't wikibooks be a more appropriate place for "worked examples"? Wikipedia is not a textbook. --[[User:345Kai\|345Kai]] ([[User talk:345Kai\|talk]]) 23:37, 23 March 2009 (UTC)		Wouldn't wikibooks be a more appropriate place for "worked examples"? Wikipedia is not a textbook. --[[User:345Kai\|345Kai]] ([[User talk:345Kai\|talk]]) 23:37, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Zahlentheorie: /* deleting some examples */

2010-07-08T13:13:17Z

deleting some examples

← Previous revision		Revision as of 13:13, 8 July 2010
Line 12:		Line 12:
	The authors' should follow their own link to "[[Worked-example effect]]" topic, which states, "it is important that worked examples be structured effectively, so that extraneous cognitive load does not impact learners"; this topic has far too much 'extraneous cognitive load' to be effective as a worked example.		The authors' should follow their own link to "[[Worked-example effect]]" topic, which states, "it is important that worked examples be structured effectively, so that extraneous cognitive load does not impact learners"; this topic has far too much 'extraneous cognitive load' to be effective as a worked example.
	[[User:NefariousPhD\|NefariousPhD]] ([[User talk:NefariousPhD\|talk]]) 03:13, 26 March 2009 (UTC)		[[User:NefariousPhD\|NefariousPhD]] ([[User talk:NefariousPhD\|talk]]) 03:13, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

			== Deleting some examples ==

			As the above poster states, some of the examples are too dense to serve as instructional material. Moreover, the examples make very esoteric use of generating function techniques and may not be appropriate for someone who is looking to find information about classic techniques. I rate these examples as follows: A 10/10 B 8/10 C 7/10 D 7/10 E 7/10 F 2/10. Let me know which of these should be deleted. -[[User:Zahlentheorie\|Zahlentheorie]] ([[User talk:Zahlentheorie\|talk]]) 13:13, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

345Kai: /* Worked Examples? */

2009-03-28T07:37:36Z

Worked Examples?

← Previous revision		Revision as of 07:37, 28 March 2009
Line 2:		Line 2:
	Wouldn't wikibooks be a more appropriate place for "worked examples"? Wikipedia is not a textbook. --[[User:345Kai\|345Kai]] ([[User talk:345Kai\|talk]]) 23:37, 23 March 2009 (UTC)		Wouldn't wikibooks be a more appropriate place for "worked examples"? Wikipedia is not a textbook. --[[User:345Kai\|345Kai]] ([[User talk:345Kai\|talk]]) 23:37, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

	I think Wikipedia is an appropriate place for worked examples; worked examples are just another way of presenting information. [[User:NefariousPhD\|NefariousPhD]] ([[User talk:NefariousPhD\|talk]]) 03:13, 26 March 2009 (UTC)		:I think Wikipedia is an appropriate place for worked examples; worked examples are just another way of presenting information. [[User:NefariousPhD\|NefariousPhD]] ([[User talk:NefariousPhD\|talk]]) 03:13, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

			::This page is rather unfortunately written in textbook style. Not suitable at all for looking up information. What's wrong with writing a wiki book on generating functions and linking it from wikipedia? That's the proper way to do this. In wikipedia it would be more useful to present the facts without all the tedium of derivations that bore half the audience and lose the other half.--[[User:345Kai\|345Kai]] ([[User talk:345Kai\|talk]]) 07:37, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

	== Is this an effective worked example? ==		== Is this an effective worked example? ==

NefariousPhD: stated this topic is appropriate for wikipedia, but it should be improved to be an effective worked example.

2009-03-26T03:13:18Z

stated this topic is appropriate for wikipedia, but it should be improved to be an effective worked example.

← Previous revision		Revision as of 03:13, 26 March 2009
Line 1:		Line 1:
	== Worked Examples? ==		== Worked Examples? ==
	Wouldn't wikibooks be a more appropriate place for "worked examples"? Wikipedia is not a textbook. --[[User:345Kai\|345Kai]] ([[User talk:345Kai\|talk]]) 23:37, 23 March 2009 (UTC)		Wouldn't wikibooks be a more appropriate place for "worked examples"? Wikipedia is not a textbook. --[[User:345Kai\|345Kai]] ([[User talk:345Kai\|talk]]) 23:37, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

			I think Wikipedia is an appropriate place for worked examples; worked examples are just another way of presenting information. [[User:NefariousPhD\|NefariousPhD]] ([[User talk:NefariousPhD\|talk]]) 03:13, 26 March 2009 (UTC)


			== Is this an effective worked example? ==

			I teach mathematics at a university and find this page so dense with mathematical jargon that it defeats its stated purpose of providing another means for people to understand the concept. Generating functions is not a difficult concept. I would advise the authors to stop trying so hard to be precise, and provide some examples so that readers can get the gist of the concept first.

			The authors' should follow their own link to "[[Worked-example effect]]" topic, which states, "it is important that worked examples be structured effectively, so that extraneous cognitive load does not impact learners"; this topic has far too much 'extraneous cognitive load' to be effective as a worked example.
			[[User:NefariousPhD\|NefariousPhD]] ([[User talk:NefariousPhD\|talk]]) 03:13, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

345Kai: ←Created page with '== Worked Examples? == Wouldn't wikibooks be a more appropriate place for "worked examples"? Wikipedia is not a textbook. --~~~~'

2009-03-23T23:37:30Z

←Created page with '== Worked Examples? == Wouldn't wikibooks be a more appropriate place for "worked examples"? Wikipedia is not a textbook. --~~~~'

New page

== Worked Examples? ==
Wouldn't wikibooks be a more appropriate place for "worked examples"? Wikipedia is not a textbook. --[[User:345Kai|345Kai]] ([[User talk:345Kai|talk]]) 23:37, 23 March 2009 (UTC)